Those who advance the hotly-debated “white sharia” meme on the alt-right appear at present to be waging a two-front war against their critics.

Fighting a war on two fronts isn’t necessarily an unworthy enterprise (though it did turn out to be a bit of a bunker bust for ol’ Adolf); however, in this case, the problem arises in that their two main modes of argumentation are mutually contradictory.

Written by the Irish political scientist Peter Mair, who died before the book was finished, Ruling The Void is a penetrating account of the steady decline of democracy in Europe. In my view, the book is far better for having been left incomplete: it stands far stronger as a negative assessment of the times than it would had the author racked his Leftist politics for some illusory and half-hearted set of “solutions” to the structural problems he describes. The book seems to have attracted far less attention than it deserves, except from certain Eurosceptics who have focused myopically on its criticisms of the European Union, ignoring the wider significance of the “hollowing of democracy” which is the book’s main theme.

Ruling the Void opens with the most damning indicator of decline: the falling level of participation in national elections. Against those political scientists who are tempted to deny the evidence of this phenomenon, Mair establishes his position beyond doubt by a thorough review of the facts: electoral turnout has certainly been falling across Europe in the last decades, not in the sense that turnout is progressively lower for every election, but in the more general sense that troughs in participation occur more and more frequently.

One of their members, Devon Arthurs, murdered two other members, then surrendered to the police, giving them cause to do a full search of the residence where the murders happened, and where they lived with yet another member, Brandon Russell, who was also arrested. (Yes, it seems they all lived together, just like The Monkees or the Young Ones).

The vast information reserves of the internet offer us paths paved with gold, fringed all around by wildernesses made of total and utter shit. Like most of us, I try to avoid wrong turnings that lead to junk content, but don't always succeed - especially when people who usually post good stuff sometimes veer off into personal ego-drama and histrionics. Lately I have been making the best of my occasional excursions into nonsense, by trying to extract some sort of useful insight from them.

In another installment of the "Nameless" Podcast, Andy Nowicki discusses the latest manifestation of the ever-expanding specter of #pizzagate: the breaking story (mostly ignored by the Lugenpresse, surprise surprise!) of New York Mayor Bill De Blasio staffer, and well-connected Democratic political insider Jacob Schwartz getting busted for having a cache of child porn on his laptop.

Earlier this month, 38-year-old Navy SEAL Senior Chief Petty Officer Kyle Milliken was killed during a combat operation some forty miles west of Mogadishu. Milliken, a battle-hardened member of the same elite SEAL Team 6 that killed Osama bin Laden in 2011, fought alongside, not behind, his compatriots in the Somali army. Milliken’s death marked a very unfortunate milestone. He became the first U.S. service member to die in combat in Somalia since Operation Gothic Serpent in 1993.

When Muslim leaders respond to terrorist attacks on their Christian subjects better than Western leaders do.

Despite the offbeat eccentricity of its leader, the Gaddafi regime played a vital role in maintaining peace and stability in the Mediterranean Basin. When, on a whim, the West decided to use its special forces and air power to oust Gaddafi as part of the Arab Neocon Spring in 2011, it unleashed all sorts of problems.

Culturist (cǔl-chər-ǐst) n. 1. An advocate of culturism. 2. One who engages in the philosophy, arts, policy creation and sciences that promote, protect and manage traditional majority cultures. 3. Adj. Of or pertaining to culturism, culturists or culturist policy.

--------

This is the third of a weekly, 8-part review of culturist policies. The series will become a short e-book. Any feedback you could provide in terms of ideas or presentation would be appreciated.

--------

Absolute Culturist, Pragmatic Culturist, & Racist Repatriation

There are three approaches to repatriation: ‘racist,’ 'absolute culturist,' and 'pragmatic culturist.' Both absolute and pragmatic culturists would immediately stop all Islamic immigration to the West, but differ on repatriation policy.

Racist repatriation policy

‘Racist repatriation’ policy gets mentioned only to highlight its vast difference from both forms of culturist repatriation.

Racist repatriation would remove all non-white people from Western nations. Such a policy would never be approved via election. And, in a multi-ethnic nation like the United States, especially given the fact that much of our military and police force are not white, attempts to implement this policy could lead to society violently collapsing.

Absolute culturist repatriation policy

‘Absolute culturists’ want the immediate repatriation of all Muslims back to their countries of origin.

Note how much subtler absolute culturist repatriation is than racist repatriation. It does not cast Hindus, Asians, Mexican and all Africans into the same net. It makes subtle distinctions based on history and belief systems: it is culturist, not racist.

However, absolute culturist repatriation suffers from the same potential for civil unrest as the racist repatriation position.

Furthermore, and importantly, the rule of law is central to western identity. If we violate the rights of citizens, we undermine order in society.

However, absolute culturist repatriation policy would have the benefit of quickly ending the threat of Jihad in the West.

In the U.S. naturalization proceedings, the potential new citizen swears, "that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic." Furthermore, they "absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty."

Naturalized citizens who have supported ISIS or Al Qaeda have committed fraud, rendering their naturalization null and void, justifying their repatriation.

Furthermore, any naturalized citizens who donated to or actively participated in a mosque that promotes Sharia or any other anti-Western values, (FGM or hijabs or polygamy, for example) may merit repatriation.

Such a policy targets hostile Muslims while protecting the rights of those willing to assimilate.

Such pragmatic repatriation programs, (in conjunction with ending the foreign funding of mosques and culturist school curriculum – discussed elsewhere), can minimize the risk of Jihad without absolute culturist repatriation’s rights violations or potential violence.

Domestically, repatriation laws can pass Constitutional scrutiny in two ways: (1) by remembering it is the separation of Church and State, not Mosque and State, (2) by classifying Islam as a political ideology.

Circumstances seem to be swaying culturists from being ‘pragmatic’ to being ‘absolute.’ But, those moving in this direction must consider the violence this could entail, and so should not do so lightly.

The problem with having free speech taboos is that sooner or later you are forced to back them up with Draconian laws that stifle all speech. This process is now well underway in the increasingly dysfunctional German state where, on Friday (19th May), new censorship legislation passed its first reading in the German parliament.

When things like the Manchester bomb attack happen, there is an immediate outpouring of articles, reports, broadcasts, and memes. Some of them are informative, many of them are repetitive and redundant, others just irritating and infuriating. It is also noticeable that many of them are attempting to tell you what to think and feel in a case where Common Sense and natural emotion would be your best guide.

One thing that struck me, listening to the BBC Radio 5's late night coverage of the aftermath of the bombing, was how similar the tone was to Radio Moscow broadcasts in the 1980s, which I remember from my childhood. Both had the same cheery emptiness of people following a script, or more accurately rigid guidelines that had been drummed into them again and again and again.

As the West reels from the latest major act of Muslim terror in its midst (this time in Manchester, England)--Andy Nowicki "Namelessly" reveals--on a not totally unrelated note-- that he finds the notion of 'white sharia' quite ignoble as a political philosophy, though not for the reasons you might expect.

Four years ago today, Lee Rigby was beheaded on the streets of Woolwich, a neighbourhood in London where I had lived while a student. This article was originally published at Dr. Kevin MacDonald's Occidental Observer in April, 2015.

You’ll remember Lee Rigby, the unfortunate British soldier who had his head hacked off by a couple of Black Muslims...in a London Street...in broad daylight...in full view of passing members of the public — many of whom treated the event with the same disinterest and disdain that Metropolitans reserve for panhandling street musicians and street performers.

You will also remember that we were immediately assured by the high and mighty that Gunner Rigby’s murder had nothing whatsoever to do with Islam, which was unequivocally a “religion of peace,” unfairly besmirched by association with a “handful” of fanatics.

I don't mean standard as in "moral standards", of course (everyone knows there's no point in looking for those nowadays). I mean standard in the military sense - the sort of standard that in Roman times took the form of the legionary eagle, carried into battle by each legion and defended to the death as a symbol of that legion's honour. We Westerners don't have one, and we do need one. Let me explain.

To anyone who has been paying attention, the US-strategy in Syria is obvious. It is to isolate and weaken the Assad government until it collapses. In order to achieve that goal it is vital to isolate Assad-controlled territory in the populous West of the country from Iraq, a largely sympathetic Shiite-dominated state, and Iran.

Culturist (cǔl-chər-ǐst) n. 1. An advocate of culturism. 2. One who engages in the philosophy, arts, policy creation and sciences that promote, protect and manage traditional majority cultures. 3. Adj. Of or pertaining to culturism, culturists or culturist policy.

--------

This is the second of a weekly, 8-part review of culturist policies. The series will become a short e-book. Any feedback you could provide in terms of ideas or presentation would be appreciated.

Culturist Epistemology

Culture is not metaphysical; ultimately, it exists in heads and institutions. You need land to grow food in order to support the heads in which culture exists. With no food, no heads; with no heads, no culture. When a Muslim immigrates, the very space he occupies is a Muslim space. When your town has a Hindu temple, that space is necessarily no longer a Western space. No ‘western essence’ permeates Muslim no-go zones; that space is no longer western.
Defensive Culturist Word Use

If the West falls, neither China nor Iran will promote ‘human rights;’ ‘human rights’ will cease to exist. To protect so - called ‘human rights’ we must protect western territory and solvency.

Accordingly, it is best to call so-called ‘human rights,’ ‘western rights.’ This will remind us that when we defend the West we defend the only culture that promotes rights. That’s why, truly, western culturism is the new liberalism.

Offensive Culturist Word Use

Cultural diversity being real dooms attempts to militarily force Muslim nations to adopt Western values and institutions. Therefore, (when not punishing them for terrorist acts), culturism advocates keeping our military out of Muslim nations.

But, verbally, we can weaken Muslim governments by degrading their values in comparison with the ‘western rights’ model. For example, we should ruthlessly mock Iran’s theocratic government and backwards women’s rights agenda.

Yet, Iran is not our concern. Reifying western pride and identity is the real goal of mocking Islam’s overall stupid brutality. Cultural identity is usually bolstered via contrast with a hated other. Islam is, particularly, suited to make the West look distinct and noble.

While culturism involves battles for land, might and economies that can sustain heads, ultimately culturists must battle for the cultural assumptions in those heads.

Culturist rights and refugees

We often hear that ‘individual rights’ trump ‘culturist rights;’ That is, if we enforce our immigration laws, a teen and her illegal mother might be separated. Individual rights do not automatically trump the West’s culturist right to have a border.

Muslim nations don't take in Christian refugees. China takes no refugees. Just like the Asian and Muslim realms, the West has culturist rights. So-called, ‘human rights’ do not trump the West’s culturist right to sovereignty.

The culturist programming of youth is not difficult. Changing adult’s views is nearly impossible. Culture is made up of populations who identify with it. Rejecting the millions of incoming ‘refugees,’ because they harbor hostile ideology, is a defensible policy position.

All Muslim ‘refugees’ must be preemptively directed to a nation state in the Islamic world.

End foreign mosque funding

The foreign funding of mosques in the West must be stopped. To do this, philosophically, we must reject multiculturalism and embrace the culturist idea that the West has a unique civilization to protect and that Islam is the West’s traditional enemy.
To make this legal, we can note that the separation of Church and State says nothing of Mosque and State.

More realistically, in America, the Foreign Agent Registration Act allows us to register foreign agents’ and stop their funds from being used for domestic propaganda. To apply this law, we must classify Islam as the political ideology of an enemy, which it is.

Ending the foreign funding of mosques does not prohibit local citizens from funding and building their own mosques.

Western rights belong to westerners individually and collectively: our Constitutional guarantee of free speech does not grant Saudi Arabia the right to build mosques in the West. Our not being able to build churches in Saudi Arabia confirms that ‘culturist rights’ do exist.

Conclusion

China’s racist immigration laws protect their national identity. Saudi Arabia’s culturist immigration laws protect theirs. The West is not a culturally neutral ‘human’ globalist space. The West has a specific culture and the right to have culturist laws that protect our culture.

The phrase ‘human rights’ is most frequently used in order to corrode western sovereignty. To win the rhetorical battle we must correctly call so-called, ‘human rights’ what they are: ‘western rights.’

----

You can read the culturist policy series intro here.
You can read more about culturism here.

Note: I am currently unwell and have taken to watching DVDs while the parts of my body injured in service to the Alt-Right slowly recuperate.

What happens when the most cucked nations in Northern Europe pool their cinematic resources to make a film about the Crusades? Exactly what you would expect: the Muslims are actually pretty decent guys and the meanies are inevitably other Whites. To top it all, the "Captain Sweden" hero character even brings a posse of cool "kebabs" back to his home country to help him build and defend his ideal community. The film in question is Arn—The Knight Templar (2010), an English release cobbled together from the original Swedish version (2007) and its sequel (2008), which might be one reason it seems overlong (139 minutes).

Made with support from Denmark, Norway, Finland and Germany, this is the biggest budget film in Swedish cinematic history ($30,000,000) and the acting and production values are fairly high standard. Even the writing is good—it is based on a trilogy of novels by Jan Guillou, a French-Swedish journalist who had links to the KGB. Except for the intrusion of modern day PC touches, you might believe you are back in the 12th century. Also, Danish Director Peter Flinth has clearly been cribbing from Mel Gibson's stunning Braveheart when it comes to battle scenes. So, all in all quite a watchable movie, and one geared to pull in Europeans interested in their history and traditions.

In his latest "Nameless" podcast, Andy Nowicki discusses the newly-released "bombshell" that DNC operative Seth Rich was the insider who gave John Podesta's hacked emails to Wikileaks, and thus helped to engineer Hillary Clinton's defeat by exposing the vast extent of the corruption taking place within her campaign.

"The elephant in the room" is an English saying that refers to something that is undeniably present, but which everyone chooses not to see. The elephant represents a major problem that must be tackled, but everyone ignores it.

In South Africa, there is one especially big elephant in the room: the murder of white people—more specifically, the murder of white farmers—by Blacks. The international media, which reports about everything and anything, simply ignores the plague of farm murders ravaging our nation.

This treatise, again, is not an investigative report; therefore, it is not within my scope to demonstrate the reality of either the #Pizzagate claims nor those surrounding these other notorious events. I know that many readers will doubt that our political, social, military, and financial rulers might in fact be remorseless human traffickers and depraved child-predators; such allegations will strike him as deluded, lurid, and paranoid.

James Burnham, in his 1941 classic The Managerial Revolution identified the managerial class and the managerial system as the new, ascendant form of power. This system, which still dominates the present-day power structure, has some troubling aspects that help to explain the growing dysfunction and decline of our society. I want to draw attention to two in particular.

First, because power is based on control rather than on ownership, there is a constant need to justify it through appeals to the emotions of the masses. Rather than being defined by the interests of the masses, democracy is defined by what can be sold to the masses, which is definitely not the same thing. Secondly, the need to demonstrate competence outweighs the need to have actual competence.

The great irony is that these two characteristics are produced by a system dedicated to efficient control and getting results, but in effect they work against efficiency and results. An interesting example is provided by the problem presented by North Korea, a so-called "rogue" nation that is rapidly developing its rocket and nuclear weapon technology.

When I first became aware of the various online outlets of the manosphere four years ago, I was struck by an inexplicable rhetorical contradiction frequently on display.

For a group ostensibly dedicated to combating the ills of cultural misandry (that is, the nearly ubiquitously socially enforced, gynocentrically-inspired loathing of all aspects of traditional masculinity), there was an underlying implication to the effect that it was in fact important, even needful, for men to strive to please women. In fact, the assertion was frequently made that, since women in truth adore “alpha” badboys and despise “beta” niceguys, it was therefore incumbent upon men to practice “game” in order to give the ladies what they want (and thus be enabled to score frequently, since chastity is apparently for suckers).

Culturism (cǔl-chər-ǐz-əm) n. The use of philosophy, art, governance policy and science to honor, promote, manage and protect traditional majority cultures.Culturist (cǔl-chər-ǐst) n. 1. An advocate of culturism. 2. One who engages in the philosophy, arts, policy creation and sciences that promote, protect and manage traditional majority cultures. 3. Adj. Of or pertaining to culturism, culturists or culturist policy.

---------

This is the first of a weekly, 8-part review of culturist policies. It will become a short e-book. Any feedback you could provide in terms of ideas or presentation would be appreciated. To prepare for the policy sections, this week’s entry will define culturist philosophy generally.

Culturist Agenda

Culturism is the opposite of multiculturalism. Whereas multiculturalism undermines the traditional majority culture’s status (being a Pakistani Dilo player is just as French as being a Jesuit), culturism acknowledges and supports the West’s traditional majority cultures.

Culturists disagree with the multiculturalists’ assertion that western governments must be culturally neutral. China’s immigration laws support Chinese identity; Iran’s curriculum promotes Islam. Western governments must also enact culturist policies to promote and protect their traditional majority cultures.

Islamic immigration is the number one threat to European existence. Islam is hostile to the West’s culture and existence. Cuturists also see dire potential in The United States’ Mexican descendant population believing that some US territory is Mexican. Thus, immigration control and assimilation are culturist policy priorities.

Domestically, multiculturalism’s anti-western agenda inciting racial tensions and the West’s declining morality are two large problems. Replacing multicultural guilt with western pride can largely reverse these problematic trends. Internationally, we must stop trying to make Muslim nations western.

Traditional majority culture?

The West’s ‘traditional majority culture’ exists at embedded levels. A village’s traditional majority culture should be protected concurrently with the national culture. And, if the local culture is traditional it will be congruent with the national culture.

A majority Muslim community in England is not congruent with England’s traditional majority culture; so culturists would seek its transformation. On a larger scale, we can condemn NAZI culture for violating the wider West’s cultural traditions.

While nationalism has a hostile relationship to communities larger than itself, culturism acknowledges western nations’ shared history and interests and so offers more opportunities for unity.

All nations, from Mexico to Saudi Arabia, and civilizations, from Asia to the Muslim world, are, and have always been, culturist. Only the West has embraced multicultural dismantling. Western civilization and nations also have a right to be culturist.

Culturism and racism

A culturist need not deny that racial IQ, temperament, and talent differences exist. But, as cultural unity is the goal of culturism, it is much more useful to focus on the fact that people of all races can be loving, hard working, moral, friendly patriots.

Acknowledging differential racial talents can be useful in countering the fractious multicultural myth that all disparities in achievement result from ‘White racism.’ Yet - since people cannot change their race - limited benefit can come from discussing race. On the contrary, all races and cultures can greatly benefit from culturist scrutiny.

And, yes, white people should take pride in having built a great civilization. But it is healthier to view this as western pride, rather than white pride. And, fantasies of making the ‘West white again’ are divisive and dangerous.

Public Discussion

Islam is a violent, dangerous culture. Mexicans have high teen pregnancy rates. East Asians study hard and so succeed. Blacks commit a disproportionate amount of violent crimes. The White divorce rate has skyrocketed. These truths have policy implications we must be free to discuss.

Yet anytime you assert that non-White cultural diversity includes negative aspects, in order to squelch discussion, multiculturalists call you an irrational, phobic ‘racist.’ Instead of becoming defensive, we must proudly call ourselves rational culturists and reassert culturist truths.

If we could get a politician or pundit to use the words ‘culturist’ or ‘culturism,’ they could go viral quickly. We need to discuss negative aspects of cultural diversity. Spread the words ‘culturist’ and ‘culturism’ today!

Donald J. Trump

When asked about inner-city crime, Trump talks about ‘jobs.’ When asked about his Muslim ban, he says it isn’t one; it is only a ban on some dangerous nations. When asked why we need a wall, Trump never speaks of the danger of having two cultures in your nation, (let alone assimilation).

Trump, in short, would be much more effective if he could speak honestly about culture. Yet, one suspects, he is terrified of being called a ‘racist.’ He needs to come out as a ‘culturist.’ We must be able to say that America, (like other western nations), has a traditional majority culture and judge people(s) by their fealty to it.

By spreading the words ‘culturism’ and ‘culturist’ we can help Trump reach his potential. Use them today!

I like to stick to my predictions. Otherwise what's the point of making them? So, when I said Marine Le Pen would win the French Presidential Election some weeks ago, I stuck to my guns, even as the polls continued to show a massive gap.

This was because all the ingredients of a Le Pen win were there, and continued to be there —and still are!—while all that could be said for Macron is that he is a belated French version of Tony Blair and Barack Obama. My mistake was believing in French cynicism. I was disappointed to find that they were not cynical enough to see through such an obvious ploy. In future I will be more cynical about French cynicism.

Marine Le Pen's loss in the French election, while expected and predictable, has nevertheless provoked an avalanche of unseemly (but also sadly predictable) social media "sperging out" amongst nationalist-minded West-defenders opposed to globalism and mass Third World immigration.

Comments on Facebook and Twitter range from the despairingly "black-pilled" ("France is over," "France is cucked,") to the forlornly resigned ("So long France, it was nice while it lasted"), to the openly angry ("Fuck you, France!") to the humorously ironic ("France surrenders again!" "Can we have our freedom fries back?")

In common with many others in this movement, I see European racial self-defence as the foundation of the Alt-Right. This does not mean, as some would have it, that this foundation is also the pinnacle, or that the Alt-Right can be reduced to it and nothing else. But in a future where the European people have been replaced, and the civilisation of Europe no longer exists in any form distinct from the modernist anti-culture to which it gave birth, everything else good and true on the Alt-Right ends up reduced to so much meaningless blog chatter.

However, I have long been aware of a serious shortcoming in ethnonationalism, which runs through all of its discourse like cracks in a wall. On the one hand, most if not all of the ethnonationalist charges against ‘foreigners’ (blacks, Muslims, Jews etc.) are both carefully reasoned and backed up with solid facts. On the other hand, cheek by jowl with these, we find statements and assumptions about ‘our own people’ (white Europeans) that are not only arbitrary and slapdash, but do not even accord with basic common sense.

British politics is going through an interesting phase. One year after the Brexit vote, the national mood seems to be pointed towards a slightly cuckish, right-of-centre Euro-skeptic Conservatism, combined with cynicism about almost every other party.

Add to this the fact that UKIP effectively sawed off the branch it was sitting on, and you get the latest local election results in the UK, namely massive but unenthusiastic gains for the Conservative Party, massive losses for a Labour Party that has been hijacked by its activist base, and the collapse of UKIP.

The storming of the Bastille was rumoured to have been started by a prisoner, the notorious Marquis De Sade, screaming down to the crowds below that they were murdering prisoners. This libertarian prank turned into The French Revolution.

It is in this grand tradition that I, the former proprietor of the almost equally notorious Hellfire Club down under, entreat you, in a De Sadean manner, to STORM the Bastille of Globalist EU Europe. Down with Brussels and those Eurocrat fiends. Marine Le Pen could well be the battering ram in this noble endeavour.

It is not my place here to make a case that events like these
are taking place right now, that they have been taking place for a while, and that
they are unlikely to stop taking place anytime soon, if ever. It is my
considered conclusion, however, that the diligent investigator who searches
with open eyes will find exactly what he doesn’t
want to find: namely, that the ritualized ravages of the strong against the
weak, of the debased against the pure, of the remorselessly potent against the
pitifully disenfranchised, have been pouring forth in one form or another for
decades, if not centuries.

We must thus refrain from making our cause a partisan one. I spoke before about
certain theological and moral notions held by the “dark” ones who hunger and
thirst to possess and maintain power and control, who are both willful and
ruthless, cunning and cruel; who, whether by nature or by choice, can indeed be called “cold-blooded” and “reptilian” even if they are human in form and
substance.

YouTube vlogger Styxhexenhammer666 on how "Nazism" on the internet is almost always a form of controlled opposition pushed by a collection of shills, Leftists, trolls, journalists, Jewish interest groups, and attention seekers.

French New Right thinker and "intellectual godfather of the Alt-Right," Alain de Benoist recently gave an interview to the Breton nationalist website Breizh-info.com. He was asked him his reactions to the first round of the French Presidential election, which saw the field narrowed down to civic nationalist Marine Le Pen and the "candidate of the broken system" Emmanuel Macron. The translation was done using online translation with common sense correction.

Alterntative Right is pleased to announce the release of Andy Nowicki's new book, Meta-#Pizzagate, available now from Amazon.com in paperback and on Kindle.

Unofficial investigations are currently underway into the #Pizzagate phenomenon, even as all official parties show themselves intensely eager to avoid the subject, while the mass media, being thoroughly discredited, nevertheless wages impotent jihads against the chimeric menace of “fake news” in a doomed, desperate effort to save face.

With Neocons apparently calling the shots in the White House, and a President looking for "foreign adventures" to compensate for domestic frustrations, a "Trump war" somewhere/ anywhere now seems a real possibility. But war is never inevitable. Here are ten examples of times when America pulled back from the brink.

(1) Ever heard the phrase, "Fifty-Four
Forty or Fight" and wonder what on earth it means? Find a map and go to
where the fifty-fourth latitude line hits the New World's west coast and then
go forty minutes north. In the 1840s, that was where many wanted the border
between the Oregon Territory and British Canada to be - and they really
wanted it. In the end Polk decided that a war with Mexico would be
easier than one with the enormous British Empire.